New 3D printed simulator for training of endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery used in a dedicated pituitary course: A French cross-sectional study.

Context: The objective was to evaluate the feasibility and usefulness of a new 3D printed simulator for endoscopic pituitary surgery. This simulator was used at the Pituitary Workshop, a French theoretical and practical course designed to teach the basics of pituitary tumour management.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study.

A clinical study of tremelimumab, alone or in combination with olaparib, for recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer.

Objective: PARP inhibitors may work synergistically to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). We performed a parallel-arm study of tremelimumab, alone or with olaparib, in patients with recurrent EOC.

Methods: Eligibility criteria included measurable disease and progression <12 months from last platinum.

Descriptive analysis and outcomes of PitNETs treated surgically during pregnancy and postpartum.

Objective: Data on pituitary neuroendocrine tumours (PitNETs) surgically treated during pregnancy are limited, and no studies have compared these cases to those treated in non-pregnant women. This study aimed to describe the clinical, radiological, and histological profiles of patients treated surgically for PitNETs during pregnancy and evaluate long-term prognosis.

Design: This study was multicentric, observational, and retrospective.

Adherence to delayed-release cysteamine in nephropathic cystinosis over time: data from the prospective CrYSTobs cohort study.

Background: Adherence to cysteamine in nephropathic cystinosis (NC) remains challenging. A better adherence with delayed-release (DR) compared to immediate-release (IR) cysteamine at 1 year was previously shown. This study aimed to evaluate adherence to DR cysteamine at 2 years.

Alternative models of funding curiosity-driven research.

Funding of curiosity-driven science is the lifeblood of scientific and technological innovation. Various models of funding allocation became institutionalized in the 20th century, shaping the present landscape of research funding. There are numerous reasons for scientists to be dissatisfied with current funding schemes, including the imbalance between funding for curiosity-driven and mission-directed research, regional and country disparities, path-dependency of who gets funded, gender and race disparities, low inter-reviewer reliability, and the trade-off between the effort and time spent on writing or reviewing proposals and doing research.